The great Obama, Part Two

I suspect that most of our readers have already seen Charles Krauthammer’s column on Barack Obama’s egomania. In fact, I may have been the last informed conservative to have read it.

Krauthammer’s piece explains a great deal. For example, I think it explains why Obama is so prone to leave himself exposed by his own words. Thus, by ridiculing Americans for not speaking foreign languages when he speaks none, Obama opened himself up to ridicule. But when he is orating to an enthralled audience, does Obama understand that he speaks no foreign languages? A Redeemer — the one we have been waiting for — would be able to speak foreign languages. So it may seem plausible (or even clear) to Obama that (yes) he can.

Consider also Obama’s habit of misstating his prior positions. Obama said on multiple occasions that the surge would not significantly reduce violence in Iraq. But after the surge did just that, Obama claimed always to have known that the insertion of additional troops would reduce violence. And weeks after advocating that we maintain a special strike force in Iraq following the completion of our general troop withdrawal, Obama denied having taken this position.

These sorts of false statements aren’t in Obama’s interest. The public has come to expect a certain amount of inconsistency in the positions politicians take. But surely it still expects politicians to speak truthfully about what positions they have taken. By not doing so, Obama left himself open, in the YouTube age, to the kind of attack ad the McCain campaign recently produced.

But if Obama believes deep-down in his own infallibility, then it’s almost inevitable that when he’s speaking he will tend to deny having taken a position that proved to be wrong, or even that proved to be impolitic. And if he believes deep-down in his omniscience, then perhaps it is not mere cynicism that lies behind his claim to be post-partisan, or to have comprehended and absorbed the essence of the conservative position on this or that issue (e.g., gun control, deregulation, faith based initiatives)

It’s been reported that before his speech to the Democratic convention in 2004, Obama was pacing (strutting?) around comparing himself to Michael Jordan. If Obama feels Jordanesque when he’s speaking, then perhaps the only test he’s able to apply to his utterances is how mighty or grandiose they make him sound. On the basketball court, Jordan unconsciously took on the law of gravity. At the podium Obama unconsciously takes on the law of contradiction.